The Supreme Court ruled that every arrested individual must be informed of the grounds for their arrest promptly, as stipulated by Article 22(1), validating their right to personal liberty. If not informed, the arrest is deemed illegal, warranting immediate release and granting bail despite statutory restrictions. Compliance verification by magistrates is mandatory.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday held that every arrested person has the fundamental right to be informed of the grounds of arrest as soon as possible. The Court emphasized that failure to do so amounts to a violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution, rendering the arrest invalid.
The Court stated that
“The requirement of informing a person arrested of grounds of arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1). Therefore, non-compliance with the requirements of Article 22(1) vitiates the arrest of the accused. Hence, further orders passed by a criminal court of remand are also vitiated.”
The ruling makes it clear that if an arrested individual is not informed about why they are being detained, the arrest itself becomes illegal.
The Supreme Court further held that such violations entitle the accused to bail, despite any statutory restrictions. The Court clarified:
“When a violation of Article 22(1) is established, it is the duty of the court to forthwith order the release of the accused. That will be a ground to grant bail even if statutory restrictions on the grant of bail exist. Statutory restrictions do not affect the power of the court to grant bail when the violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution is established.”
ALSO READ: BREAKING | Supreme Court of India: Guided Tours Every Saturday – Book Your Spot Online
The Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and N Kotishwar Singh also ruled that when an arrested person is produced before a judicial magistrate for remand, it is the duty of the magistrate to ascertain whether Article 22(1) has been followed. If there is non-compliance, the arrest will be deemed illegal, and the accused cannot be remanded.
However, the Court also clarified that an illegal arrest does not nullify the investigation, charge sheet, or trial.
The Court made it clear that
“Filing a charge sheet and order of cognizance will not validate an arrest which is per se unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution of India. We cannot tinker with the most important safeguards provided under Article 22.”
The Supreme Court laid down the following guidelines to safeguard the rights of arrested persons under Article 22:
- Informing the arrested person of the grounds of arrest is a mandatory requirement under Article 22(1).
- This information must be communicated effectively, in a language that the arrested person understands.
- If an arrested person alleges that they were not informed of the reasons for their arrest, the burden is on the Investigating Officer/Agency to prove compliance.
- Failure to comply with Article 22(1) violates the fundamental rights of the accused and their personal liberty under Article 21.
- Such non-compliance will vitiate the arrest and any remand orders issued by a criminal court.
- Even though an illegal arrest does not affect the investigation, charge sheet, or trial, the filing of a charge sheet does not justify an unconstitutional arrest.
- Magistrates must ensure compliance with Article 22(1) before granting remand.
- If a violation is established, the court must immediately order the release of the accused, regardless of statutory restrictions on bail.
The ruling came while granting relief to a man arrested in Haryana on charges of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and forgery. The accused claimed that he was never informed of the grounds for his arrest and was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, as required by law. Shockingly, he was also handcuffed and chained to a hospital bed while in police custody.
ALSO READ: Allahabad High Court Declares Holidays for Maha Kumbh Mela 2025
The Punjab and Haryana High Court had earlier refused to declare his arrest illegal, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court. The State of Haryana argued that the information about his arrest was recorded in official documents, which they believed was sufficient.
The Supreme Court disagreed and criticized the State’s actions, stating:
“He was taken to a hospital while he was handcuffed, and he was chained to the hospital bed. This itself is a violation of the fundamental right of the appellant under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The right to live with dignity is a part of the rights guaranteed under Article 21.”
The Court also rebuked the Punjab and Haryana High Court for dismissing the accused’s allegations as a “bald allegation.” The Supreme Court held:
“All courts, including the High Court, have a duty to uphold fundamental rights. Once a violation of a fundamental right under Article 22(1) was alleged, it was the duty of the High Court to go into the said contention and decide in one way or the other.”
The Supreme Court declared the arrest illegal and ordered the immediate release of the accused while clarifying that his criminal trial would continue. The State of Haryana was also directed to issue guidelines to ensure that no arrested person is handcuffed to hospital beds in the future.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, assisted by Advocates Jasmine Damkewala and Archit Singh, represented the accused, while Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra appeared for the complainant.
Case Title – Vihaan Kumar vs State of Haryana
Read the Judgement here:
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES